tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2286723931381409375.post2431058475164683765..comments2024-01-27T16:24:00.233+08:00Comments on Reinventing Parking: Want more parking? Careful what you wish for!Paul Barterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05442704054375929398noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2286723931381409375.post-90557777575179916842014-03-04T14:20:06.239+08:002014-03-04T14:20:06.239+08:00I'm from New Zealand, I'm taking note, and...I'm from New Zealand, I'm taking note, and I'd also like to add some comments.<br /><br />As you say the black friday excercise wasn't at all scientific - the photographs could have been taken before the centers opened, in communities hard-hit by recession, and a variety of reasons - but it does raise some interesting points for consideration.<br /><br />Here in NZ the accepted best-practice design target for retail (mall) parking is not to target the busiest day but the 30th-highest hour accepting that for the 30 busiest shopping hours there will be insufficient parking. That may or may not match with the local parking minimums.<br /><br />It is also not unknown for larger retail centres to provide parking above the minimum if they think it will make their centre more attractive than competing centres. <br /><br />I have seen centres built to the same minimum parking requirements with very different parking demands over time - here older centres tend to see a decline in customer numbers when ever a new centre is opened - the latest centre is bigger and better and the "place to be". Where under-utilised parking is at-grade it is relatively easy to convert to another use, but I would agree multiple-level parking structures present a more expensive barrier to redevelopment. <br /><br />The use of parking minimums for storefronts in established neighbourhoods is the wrong approach. Aside from the barrier highlighted in your post it is inefficient for small stores to each provide 5 spaces. It is far more efficient to group that parking into a communal area - parking is easier to find, easier to manage, less parking is required, and the resulting area generally works a lot better. This is not an argument to get rid of all parking minimums - it is an argument for authorities to provide better solutions as it is impractical to leave the provision of communal parking areas to property owners in areas with fragmented ownership.<br /><br />I some of the arguments for getting rid of parking minimums, arguments like "let developers decide their own provision"; however I have yet to be convinced on the merits of that argument, at least in some areas. Many developers are likely to provide insufficient parking - and in many cases that will change demand for travel or move people to other modes; but in some cases, particularly where large retail malls are located in residential neighbourhoods the result will be different. In those cases the overall parking demand will remain unchanged but it will be located throughout the residential street network. This moves the cost off the developer, off the motorist, and onto the residents and other users of the residential street who are left with no parking and severely reduced amenity. Measures to manage parking in favour of residents have been tried but are difficult to do well.<br /><br />Parking minimums may have been introduced for all kinds of poor reasons, but there is at least one good reason for having some parking minimums - set at an appropriate level of course.<br />Wes Edwardshttp://streetsforpeople.comnoreply@blogger.com